What difficulties do you think might arise when trying to understand ideas from the past, especially when those ideas are so dif
ferent from our modern thinking? Do you think primary resources show a complete picture of the period they are from? Give an example or two to illustrate your answer.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
The difficulties I think might arise when trying to understand ideas from the past, especially when those ideas are so different from our modern thinking are that people cannot understand the circumstances that were present in past events in order to understand the meaning of those events. If we want to understand how and why things happened in the past without knowing those circumstances, then our view would be biased or incomplete. Primary resources show a complete picture of the period they are from but in a partial way. You have to connect the dots, the stories of that time in the past to have the full perspective of the events.
The example would be the following. If you try to understand the reasons that led to the American Civil War just from the perspective of the southern states, your information would be biased. You have to know both sides of the story to have the full view. Again, understand the circumstances will help you to get the right idea.
I believe that the way we socialize, and express our thoughts and ideas currently would greatly impact our understanding of ideas in history. I don't think that one would fully be able to capture and show the differences in past and present social interaction. One of the most common idea being presented in today's world is technology, the latest generation has grown up knowing all the ins and outs of modern technology. This is a concept that would've been foreign to people 80 or more years ago.
North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia (the Southern States) were all founded as proprietary states. These were grants of land requested by people that were made into charters. Our answer is false.
